tensor777:
This is not a joke topic Vicky. Someone that says come as you are and dress as if you're going clubbing and another that tells you to wear long skirt and blouse or long dresses which one of the two is devilish.?
I am being serious.

tensor777:
Well from your posts perhaps you are an undergraduate who is "compelled" to attend a "no-trousers" church whilst in the family
home. The thing is there are always rules and regulations in organisations we all have to obey them.

Merely saying that the Bible and Holy Spirit is your guide is not good enough and does not cut it in my view. First of all you need to obey your elders in the church before you can correctly hear from the Holy Spirit and properly interpret the scriptures

My own guess is that you just want to wear what your happening friends are wearing and you do so whilst on campus.
However Christianity has never been about following the crowd or being popular. It is about doing the right thing and saying the truth all the time..

vickyO: And don't try to figure out Christianity by what you see and what you think. Figure it out by checking the Word of God.

chiwex:

If any Man be in Christ,He is a new creature,Old things(both old ways of of indecent dressing and wearing of trousers as a Lady) are passed away and all things are become new.Don't You Get it?

vickyO:
I never knew that was the criteria for getting filled with the Holy Ghost.
Exactly what we are speaking against.
Majority of Christians in Nigeria, are upholders of the non trousers doctrine.
I am not a crowd follower but a Christ's...

spencerwilliams: ar u in dis country atal?how wil u say majority of nigerian christian are upholdas of non trousa doctrin,just go 2 d market,walk along d road nd just count does [b]women on trousas nd d ones [/b]on long skirt u wil know dat d upholders of trousa doctrines ar much.

Iruolycious: The ultimate question that these NO TROUSER advocates cannot answer is, is deut. 22:5 talking abt trousers and trousers only? What abt Tshirts, shirts, Polos, Blouses, face caps and Jerseys which were also initially made 4 men? R they also sin? They cant answer truthfully and then dey call u sturbbon when dey realize they r wrong. Smh...

chiwex:

If any Man be in Christ,He is a new creature,Old things(both old ways of of indecent dressing and wearing of trousers as a Lady) are passed away and all things are become new.Don't You Get it?

vickyO:
Let me break it down.
MFM upholds this doctrine, do you know how many members they have? male and female inclusive
Redeemed, some of their members uphold this doctrine.
Deeper life upholds it.
The Lord's Chosen upholds it.
CAC upholds it
Some Baptists uphold it.

The above churches have more members than any other church in Nigeria.
Men also uphold non trouser wearing.
Most of them are men sef, they just impose on the women.

Great_omotoy: Vicky, what u need is a divine REVELATION about this issue. The Day God Revealed the Danger of attachment (artificial hair) to My MUM, that same day She barbed her hair and stopped using them. Pray to God to reveal it to u so that u can teach others.

spencerwilliams: now how many of dem realy practice wat d say,i v seen women who don't wear trousas in church,but at home they wear,nd i believe dat all d churches u just mentioned has people like dat,becos some ar just compeled 2 do so.

Great_omotoy: Vicky, what u need is a divine REVELATION about this issue. The Day God Revealed the Danger of attachment (artificial hair) to My MUM, that same day She barbed her hair and stopped using them. Pray to God to reveal it to u so that u can teach others.

vickyO:
I never knew that was the criteria for getting filled with the Holy Ghost.
Exactly what we are speaking against.
Majority of Christians in Nigeria, are upholders of the non trousers doctrine.
I am not a crowd follower but a Christ's...

haibe:

They will now tell you all upper garments are shirts, lol.

Iruolycious: I'm not Vicky but i think d 1 with Devilish doctrines is above all d 1 who tries 2 teach man-made doctrines so as 2 b approved of MEN. Out ward show. Goats in sheeps clothings. I don't knw hw pple who go clubbing dress sha but according 2 d bible if it's MODEST, then it is acceptable to God.

Iruolycious: u may b intrested 2 know that a woman, Mary Baxter also had a "Divine Revelation of Heaven and Hell" and "Jesus" didnt tell her it was sinful 2 wear trousers, make up, or jewelries considering d fact she uses those things. I wuldnt want 2 bliv he 4got 2 point those thngs out 2 her. Or was it not dsame "Jesus" that 2k d both of them on d tour? The earlier u realize d Devil is workin 2 deciv pple with false visions d better u'll appriciate d Bible.

tensor777:
You are the one who brought up the highly irrelevant shirt argument even though this thread which you opened is about trousers.
Can you not comprehend that the issue here is about DECENCY not about which attire is male or female, although that is important.
You need to open your eyes and see and also listen very carefully to what people are saying, and stop being so stubborn.

tensor777:
See what you wrote.Totally off point. You don't go clubbing? But you don't really need to go clubbing to know how club girls dress do you? Find that out for yourself and compare it with what you wear to your church.
Who decides what is modest? Well you should leave that to your pastor if the way you dress is causing issues and stop being so stubborn.

tensor777:
Keep kidding yourself
How can both be saying the truth when the accounts are totally contradictory. One of them is lying.
However this comes down to wisdom. The 1st woman Margaret Amure used to wear all these adornments before her divine encounter but after that renounced them and genuinely confessed and repented from her past sinful lifestyle and whereas this Baxter woman wore adornments before and after her supposed divine encounter. Is the purpose of divine encounters not to change us from what we are to whom we should be.
Isn't it obvious to you that the Baxter woman did not have a genuine divine encounter.

chiwex:

If any Man be in Christ,He is a new creature,Old things(both old ways of of indecent dressing and wearing of trousers as a Lady) are passed away and all things are become new.Don't You Get it?

vickyO:
I never knew that was the criteria for getting filled with the Holy Ghost.
Exactly what we are speaking against.
Majority of Christians in Nigeria, are upholders of the non trousers doctrine.
I am not a crowd follower but a Christ's...

captivating:

What of Tshirts worn by ladies, that one won't pass away??

captivating:

What if it doesn't cause issues?

tensor777:
Can we stick to why ladies wear trousers to church even in defiance of constituted authority.
Lets leave T-shirts packet shirts and denim jackets out of it.

captivating:
So because baxter still wears adornments, it means she is lying?
And because the other lady stopped wearing ornaments, it means she is telling the truth?
This guy must be easily fooled by those hypocrites outward dressing oo.

tensor777:
It's more than that and you know it. However though she is telling the truth, I accept that it is not what you want to hear. Get over it.

tensor777:
Then why are you here and why was the thread created?

A book entitled A Divine Revelation of Hell by Mary K. Baxter is said to chronicle Baxter’s forty-night journey through heaven and hell. While being interviewed by Sid Roth on “It’s Supernatural,” a program broadcast by Daystar, Baxter stated that Jesus personally took her through hell for thirty nights and through heaven for ten nights. She also stated that Jesus told her to write about this so people can “know that hell is real and how people can avoid going there.” In other words, Baxter claims that Jesus wanted this book written so people can hear the gospel. Baxter discussed other things that she claimed Jesus showed her. The program encourages people to purchase the book for a “donation” of $18. (Full transcript)

There are grave problems with this book. First, if this is truly a “divine” revelation from God, then it should be included in Scripture. Second, to say that Jesus wanted Baxter to write a book about how to overcome evil and be saved, then that presumes that the Bible does not already contain this message.

Problem One: Revelation is Closed
There are two views regarding revelation: closed vs. open. Before explaining these things, I must first define revelation. Revelation is information that God makes known about himself and his plan that has never before been made known. This differs from illumination, which is to make revelation understood. When most people say they are receiving or presenting a revelation, they actually are referring to illumination; they are using the incorrect term.

Many Christians believe that revelation is closed; some believe it is open. Closed revelation means that God has revealed all he chose to reveal about himself. Scripture and nature contain that revelation; Jesus is the living revelation, but it is through Scripture that we know about Jesus. Open revelation means that there are still things that are not known that God still intends to make known. Those who hold to a closed revelation believe that the Bible is complete and no new books will be added. Open revelation Christians believe that there are books that may be included with Scripture at a later date.

If Baxter is correct, then Scripture, as we have it in the Bible, is incomplete. Also, because her book is claimed to be “divine” revelation, she is equating it with Scripture, which is an open revelation view. However, Scripture addressed this question already. The final book written, the book of Revelation, given to the apostle John, contains this answer. At the end of the book, Jesus tells John:

I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.-Revelation 22:18-19, NASB

This statement was given by Christ at the end of the final revelation given to man. This was done, I believe, intentionally in order to make it known that revelation is closed. If revelation is open, then this statement is nullified. Whether one believes that these verses apply only to the book of Revelation or to the whole of Scripture, if someone receives new revelation then they are adding to or taking away from the book. This is because they are promoting “revelation” that adds to or takes away from what is written in the book of Revelation and Scripture, including the gospel, theology, and prophecy. One must ask why Jesus would condemn anyone who takes away from or adds to the book if revelation is open. If revelation is open, then Jesus’ statement is nullified. However, this statement stands true and closes revelation.

Baxter’s book supposedly gives new revelation about all the issues addressed in Scripture generally and the book of Revelation specifically. However, since revelation is closed, one must reject her book because it is not divine revelation, but either a commentary, heresy, or fiction.

Problem Two: Scripture is Complete
Baxter claims that Jesus wanted her to write this book so people will know how to overcome evil and be saved. In other words, because Jesus wanted people to have the gospel, he needed her to write this book. This presumes that Scripture as found in the Bible does not already address these issues. However, there are many passages that present the gospel message. Many passages deal with overcoming sin, evil, and Satan. Many passages teach about hell. In short, Scripture already teaches what she claims her book is supposed to reveal.

Another implication of her claim is that if the gospel was not known until her book came out, then how did all the millions of people learn the gospel from a Bible that supposedly does not contain the gospel? How did they get saved without her book?

The truth is, Paul made it clear that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17, NASB). In other words, Scripture contains all we need in order to know how to be saved and grow in Christ in order to glorify God. Baxter’s book is not needed.

Conclusion
Christians should avoid Baxter’s book. It is not revelation, as she claims. Based on her claims that the book is not illumination, but new revelation, it violates the teaching in Scripture, demotes Scripture, and is, therefore, heresy.

https://www.nairaland.com/965982/book-mary-baxter-dangerous-not